Avengers: Endgame (Russo Bros)

[Dukefrukem]

My interpretation is that he put his faith in Tony to be the right person for the right moment, that he banked on Tony to do what he foresaw was necessary in an ocean of almost impossible odds. He probably still didn't like him, but he did believe in him. Perhaps he had a backup plan in case things did not go right, but the battle was a little too chaotic to depend on that. He just had to be there to help nudge Tony into seeing the choice.

What? No. This one is easy. In the 14 million different scenarios Strange saw with only one scenario where they came out winning. That one event needed Tony alive. Thanos was going to kill Tony in IW and Strange also knew the only way he could keep Tony alive, would be to give up the soul stone. Tony would never have perfected the time machine or made the Iron Man Gauntlet, which means the events in Endgame would never have occurred.

They bring it up twice in Endgame to remind people why that decision was made in IW. It definitely relied on things falling into place, but Strange saw and knew what needed to happen. The Ancient One also knew this.

[Skitch]

(2) Why did Strange give up his stone so easily?

My interpretation of that is because it was the only way to lead to their eventual win. The only scenario he previewed with the outcome they desired.

[Skitch]

What? No. This one is easy. In the 14 million different scenarios Strange saw with only one scenario where they came out winning. That one event needed Tony alive. Thanos was going to kill Tony in IW and Strange also knew the only way he could keep Tony alive, would be to give up the soul TIME stone. Tony would never have perfected the time machine or made the Iron Man Gauntlet, which means the events in Endgame would never have occurred.

They bring it up twice in Endgame to remind people why that decision was made in IW. It definitely relied on things falling into place, but Strange saw and knew what needed to happen. The Ancient One also knew this.

...

[Wryan]

You think in 14 million different versions he only gave up the stone in one? That seems unlikely to me. To me it's about way more than just needing to keep Tony alive. That seems rather banal a reason.

[Wryan]

Debatable. There's a line in IW where Quill turns around in shock and Nebula says "Gamora....He took her to Vormir, he came back with the soul stone and she didn't"

That's what I'm talking about. In no way, none whatsoever, is it suggested that she definitely knows about the soul-for-soul deal, and that's what I was responding to Irish about. I'm just saying she deduced that Gamora obviously didn't come back from whatever happened.

[Dukefrukem]

You think in 14 million different versions he only gave up the stone in one? That seems unlikely to me. To me it's about way more than just needing to keep Tony alive. That seems rather banal a reason.

No. There was probably seven million different versions played out where Strange gave up the Time stone. But the only version that worked is where he did.

That's what I'm talking about. In no way, none whatsoever, is it suggested that she definitely knows about the soul-for-soul deal, and that's what I was responding to Irish about. I'm just saying she deduced that Gamora obviously didn't come back from whatever happened.

Oh right. Gotcha.

[Dukefrukem]

[Irish]

I was about to write "good review" until I read your last spoiler. How exactly is this movie a #MAGA movie? I'm lost on that.

#MAGA is predicated on returning the country to a mythical point when society was somehow better. If only we could make things exactly right, like they were before, then America -- and by extension, the world -- would be better off. It's obsession with idealized history.

"Endgame" carries a similar obsession. It's packed with characters who can't let go. The movie's focus extends beyond ~3 billion deaths (which we never really see or hear about) and into the stories of heroes like Clint, Scott, and Cap. If only the Avengers could make things right, like they were before, then they will redeem the world.

When Tony returns from space, the first thing out of his mouth is basically, "I told you so." This is in character, but the way he expresses it troubled me: He reminds everyone they would have been better off trading freedom for security, and RDJ's line reading derides the idea that freedom is a value worth having, even in the face of tragedy.

The last time Tony played with technology on a God-like level, he created Ultron. When that happened, Bruce and Steve had a lot to say about it. This time, though, everyone tows the line. There isn't dissent. There are no alternate viewpoints. Cap, formerly portrayed as an ideological purist, has nothing to say about anything. (Hell, you could give every single one of his lines to War Machine or Falcon and it wouldn't make a difference.)

When our heroes appear at Tony's remote woodland cabin, he's only on board with their ideas if it means he's able to conserve what he already has -- his family. He's fine with a massive change to the world as long as it doesn't effect him personally. (The movie skips the opportunity to present him with a Sophie's choice between the life of his daughter and the lives of 3 billion people, but I can't blame it too much. That would have turned Iron Man into even more of a tinhorn Jesus.)

Captain America (ffs!) ends his story by literally spending the rest of his life in the past, with his idealized girl in an idealized life.

The neat trick of the movie is that it's not about returning to the past to effect the present (a la "Days of Future Past," or, really, any other time travel movie). It's about bringing pieces of the past into the present to make necessary change. And the characters achieve what they do not by traveling to random points in the timeline, but by going back into the moments of their own lives.

This is on top of the usual fascist tropes that show up in superhero and action stories, but they irked me twice over here because "Endgame" doubles down on all of them: the reliance on romantic symbolism (Mjolinir and Cap's shield are treated with the sanctity of religious objects); the repeated maudlin character beats around nuclear and ad-hoc families and the way it fetishizes family life (Clint and Scott's individual stories, Tony's scenes with his father, Natasha's lines about how the Avengers are all she had); a view of violence that's so positive that killing is redemptive (Clint's entire storyline, but also Thor's dialogue about how Thanos needs to be killed "properly" the second time around.); the usual focus on idealized masculinity (while women are present on screen, most of them are also safely in the background, and key relationships, like Cap's and Clint's, are practically ripped out of a Norman Rockwell painting); and finally the idea of rebirth (everyone who was snapped is resurrected and the global state is made whole).

But "Endgame's" most troubling idea might be the revelation that the Avengers have no faith in humanity, in our adaptability and our resilience --- values often championed in other fantasy and sci-fi --- but somehow it's only up to them to save us.

[TGM]

I’ve also seen a number of people make the exact opposite argument, that Thanos is an intended Trump stand-in, the snap is supposed to represent the 2016 election, and the movie is about what’s happened to the world in that time, and how we’ve got to return to a time before he fucked everything up. Meanwhile, I think both of these arguments are a pretty big stretch, and honestly think they just told the story they wanted to tell, without any particular political motives driving their writing decisions, and anything anyone might see one way or the other is merely coincidental. Most of the motives in the movie feel character driven, not politically driven, which is part of the reason this entry in particular is such a breath of fresh air compared to a lot of these flicks. Really, the all female lineup at the end is the only thing that stood out as an actual intended political statement of any sort in the movie, but that’s what I got out of it in any case.

[Dukefrukem]

I really like Irish's theory better than the Thanos Trump theory.

Slight nitpick; we do hear about the 3 billion deaths. We sit through a support group. q

[Irish]

I’ve also seen a number of people make the exact opposite argument, that Thanos is an intended Trump stand-in, the snap is supposed to represent the 2016 election, and the movie is about what’s happened to the world in that time, and how we’ve got to return to a time before he fucked everything up.

Okay, but how is that supported by the text?

Most of the motives in the movie feel character driven, not politically driven, which is part of the reason this entry in particular is such a breath of fresh air compared to a lot of these flicks.

The movie isn't as obviously political as something such as "Star Wars," but it definitely expresses a viewpoint by what the characters say and do (especially Tony and Clint). It's pretty hard to argue those viewpoints aren't right wing.

A lot of the other stuff I said about #MAGA and fascism is more akin to cultural studies bullshit, so I'll give ya that. (I still think it's in the movie, though, intentionally or not.)

Slight nitpick; we do hear about the 3 billion deaths. We sit through a support group. q

Yeah, but notice how nobody mentions the workaday dead directly. When the one guy talks about going out on a date, he speaks about his and his date's emotional reactions to the tragedy at large (eg: the both cried at different points in the dinner). He doesn't relate a single detail about anyone who died, not even their name or their relationship to him.

Granted, those particular details aren't the purpose of the scene. If the movie provided those details and let an actor act it, then the audience's attention would shift and they might feel something the directors don't want them to feel --- because the purpose of the scene is for Cap to talk about Peggy and half-heartedly repeat the phrase "Ya gotta move on" and underline the idea that Cap can't do that.

To borrow from something I read recently --- the Avengers take a "God's eye view " of the situation and that never changes, because the movie barely relates detail about how the world is different since the snap. (At one point, Cap says something about how whales swim the Hudson now because there's less pollution. But that's pretty much it.)

[TGM]

Okay, but how is that supported by the text?

I don’t personally think it is, which is my argument entirely. I only bring it up to point out how I’ve noticed different people claiming the movie is making different political statements, whereas I personally don’t think that it is.

You might see one thing, another person watching the same movie might see the complete opposite. But either way, I personally don’t think either was the authorial intent. Where other people are seeing politics, I’m seeing a big bombastic comic book action movie where some especially fucked up shit happened, and our heroes have to do whatever it takes to undo that fucked up shit and save the day, all the while taking us on a journey through this 20+ movie series’ history as a means of tying up loose ends and highlighting a number of the key moments that lead us to this point. I see it more as a celebration of everything leading to this point, a going away tour of sorts before sending us off from this extended arc in the MCU. And I honestly don’t think it’s intended to be read as being much deeper than that.

It’s not a movie that’s attempting to make a statement, it’s attempting to wrap up 20+ movies’ worth of stories and characters, and send us off in as satisfying a manner as possible. And I think that task alone was almost certainly quite enough of a juggling act for the writers and filmmakers to try and tackle without also intentionally forcing in any real world politics in the mix as well.

[Grouchy]

You might see one thing, another person watching the same movie might see the complete opposite. But either way, I personally don’t think either was the authorial intent. Where other people are seeing politics, I’m seeing a big bombastic comic book action movie where some especially fucked up shit happened, and our heroes have to do whatever it takes to undo that fucked up shit and save the day, all the while taking us on a journey through this 20+ movie series’ history as a means of tying up loose ends and highlighting a number of the key moments that lead us to this point. I see it more as a celebration of everything leading to this point, a going away tour of sorts before sending us off from this extended arc in the MCU. And I honestly don’t think it’s intended to be read as being much deeper than that.

It is all of that, but texts are never innocent and, frankly, I enjoyed the hell out of this movie, but Irish's interpretation makes a lot of sense. Either intentionally or not, Endgame contrasts a portrayal of a somber, conflictive era that comes as a result of the failure to defeat Thanos with a simpler, idealized past based around the concepts of good and evil - and the heroes intend to go back to that. This is supported by the text in a way that the Thanos/Trump theory, at least as far as you outlined it, fails to accomplish.

EDIT: I don't high five Irish in the same way based on his plot hole remarks. I'm fine with the writing, Nebula didn't know the cost of the soul stone and Dr. Strange's calculations make sense as much as we can make sense of a calculation that's impossible to make.

[Dukefrukem]

Agreed. Plot holes aside, the interpretation feels spot on.

I watched this again last night. I may have to adjust my rankings a bit. The first half is just so somber; It's not really until Professor Hulk is introduced where things become a little more lively.

[Dukefrukem]

I don't think I would ever go to a movie again if my theater acted this way. Is this how it is in California for everything? I'm not saying dont have some kind of genuine reaction, but you might as well put this on an episode of Mystery Science Theater.

This is obnoxious as fuck. Am I grumpy old man?? There's literally a reaction for everything on the screen.

[Skitch]

I almost made it 3 minutes. I would be furious. Shut the FUCK up.

[Ezee E]

I'm guessing that's how it is for many opening weekends in places where there's people dressing up for sold out shows.

I went to a sold out 3 PM-ish show. Nobody was dressed up, and while there were was some applause and reactions, it was never close to like that.

I did have that for the Quiet Place when I went to a terrible suburban theater on a Saturday opening weekend and I think it made me not like the movie.

[Philip J. Fry]

[Dead & Messed Up]

Didn't care for this one, although some of the Tony beats were nice, and the final face-off generates a sort of inevitable charge thanks to the time spent with these characters. I don't think the Russos and their writing team are good at creating functional stories-- stories that confidently take you from one moment to the next-- but not at particularly coherent or engaging ones.

[Dukefrukem]

Didn't care for this one, although some of the Tony beats were nice, and the final face-off generates a sort of inevitable charge thanks to the time spent with these characters. I don't think the Russos and their writing team are good at creating functional stories-- stories that confidently take you from one moment to the next-- but not at particularly coherent or engaging ones.

Can you elaborate more on this?

[Dukefrukem]

Anyone want to do this tonight?

https://www.instagram.com/p/B_d2gxll...ource=ig_embed

[Ezee E]

Anyone want to do this tonight?

https://www.instagram.com/p/B_d2gxll...ource=ig_embed

Maybe if it was Infinity War.

[megladon8]

So this was good, not great.

I'm pretty exhausted with superheroes, so the fact that it not only held my attention but also kept me thoroughly engaged and excited despite knowing all the twists is impressive.

For as many genuinely touching and heartfelt moments as it has (Tony running into someone in the 70s, Rogers doing the same), it also has some attempts that are painfully, embarrassingly bad (Hawkeye and Black Widow fighting over who gets to sacrifice themselves...that was awful).

Also, man, there is some AWFUL CGI in this. Thanos looked much better in Infinity War. And Hulk looked really rough at times. Why was the CGI better in the 2012 film? Was it just that there was too damned much and they were spread too thin on this one?

Major props for featuring Nebula more prominently. She is effing awesome.

My parents love all the Marvel movies, but would hate this one. And I would completely understand their disliking it, and even agree with them on some points.

But overall I liked it.

[DFA1979]

What if I liked this movie but I think it needed the X-Men cause that would be neat? I think both works here.